Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04616-07
Original file (04616-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINOTON DC 20370-5100



 TJR
Docket No: 4616-07
3 April 2008








This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 2008. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy on 8 September 1982 at age 23 and served without disciplinary incident until 19 May 1983, when you were convicted by civil authorities of being drunk in public, resisting arrest, and disturbing the peace. You were sentenced to a $160 fine, confinement for 25 days, and court cost. The confinement was suspended upon payment of the fine and court cost. About a month later, on 17 June 1983, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) . The punishment imposed was reduction to paygrade E-1, restriction and extra duty for 25 days, and a $572 forfeiture of pay.
On 17 May and 15 June 1984 you received NJP for wrongful possession of marijuana, two specifications of wrongful use of marijuana, two specifications of carrying a weapon, introduction of marijuana aboard ship, 12 periods of absence from your appointed place of duty, and disobedience.



On 19 June 1984 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. At that time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 22 June 1984 your commanding officer recommended an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
On 13 July 1984 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of destroying government property, setting fire to a television, and endeavoring to impede an investigation. You were sentenced to confinement for 30 days and a $390 forfeiture of pay. Subsequently, your commanding officer’s recommendation for separation by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct was disapproved. At that time your commanding officer was directed to reprocess you for separation and to include your most recent offenses. As a result, you were again notified of an administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military and civilian authorities, and again you waived your right to consult with counsel and to present your case to an ADB.
On 26 August 1984 the discharge authority approved the latter recommendation and directed an other than honorable discharge, and on 10 September 1984 you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to have your discharge upgraded and the passage of time. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct in both the military and civilian communities, which resulted in three NJPs, a court-martial conviction, and conviction by civil authorities. Finally, you were given two opportunities to defend yourself and possibly obtain a better characterization of service, but failed to do so when you waived your procedural rights. Accordingly, your application has been denied.
The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board.



2
In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,


W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00082-11

    Original file (00082-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of two...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05711-06

    Original file (05711-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You reenlisted in the Navy on 22 June 1981 after eight years of prior honorable service. On 11...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4306 13

    Original file (NR4306 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2014. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in five NJPs and a civil conviction. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00904 12

    Original file (00904 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 2012. On 31 January 1983, you were again UA for 20 days with no disciplinary action taken by your chain of command. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11454-10

    Original file (11454-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 28 November 1982, you received NJP for unauthorized absence from your unit for a period of six days. You were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct (drug abuse).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01514 12

    Original file (01514 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Shortly thereafter, on 30 April 1984, your commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by three positive urinalyses, two NJPs for drug use, and civil conviction for DWI. Consequently, when applying...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03979-12

    Original file (03979-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 2013. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 6 April 1984, your case was heard by the ADB and by a unanimous vote of 3-0 you were recommended for administrative separation with an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8675 13

    Original file (NR8675 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in Support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. You were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct (drug abuse). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR08675 13

    Original file (NR08675 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in Support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. You were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct (drug abuse). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02811-07

    Original file (02811-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, period of service without disciplinary incident, time served in Beirut, post service conduct, and the passage of time. Consequently, when applying for a...